Department of Orthopedics, Affiliated Zhongshan Hospital of Dalian University, Dalian, Liaoning 116001, China.
Chin Med J (Engl). 2010 Nov;123(21):3049-54.
For partial-thickness tears of the rotator cuff, double-row fixation and transtendon single-row fixation restore insertion site anatomy, with excellent results. We compared the biomechanical properties of double-row and transtendon single-row suture anchor techniques for repair of grade III partial articular-sided rotator cuff tears.
In 10 matched pairs of fresh-frozen sheep shoulders, the infraspinatus tendon from 1 shoulder was repaired with a double-row suture anchor technique. This comprised placement of 2 medial anchors with horizontal mattress sutures at an angle of ≤ 45° into the medial margin of the infraspinatus footprint, just lateral to the articular surface, and 2 lateral anchors with horizontal mattress sutures. Standardized, 50% partial, articular-sided infraspinatus lesions were created in the contralateral shoulder. The infraspinatus tendon from the contralateral shoulder was repaired using two anchors with transtendon single-row mattress sutures. Each specimen underwent cyclic loading from 10 to 100 N for 50 cycles, followed by tensile testing to failure. Gap formation and strain over the footprint area were measured using a motion capture system; stiffness and failure load were determined from testing data.
Gap formation for the transtendon single-row repair was significantly smaller (P < 0.05) when compared with the double-row repair for the first cycle ((1.74 ± 0.38) mm vs. (2.86 ± 0.46) mm, respectively) and the last cycle ((3.77 ± 0.45) mm vs. (5.89 ± 0.61) mm, respectively). The strain over the footprint area for the transtendon single-row repair was significantly smaller (P < 0.05) when compared with the double-row repair. Also, it had a higher mean ultimate tensile load and stiffness.
For grade III partial articular-sided rotator cuff tears, transtendon single-row fixation exhibited superior biomechanical properties when compared with double-row fixation.
对于肩袖部分厚度撕裂，双排固定和腱内单排固定恢复插入部位解剖结构，效果极佳。我们比较了双排和腱内单排缝线锚定技术修复 III 级部分关节侧肩袖撕裂的生物力学特性。
在 10 对配对的新鲜冷冻羊肩中，一侧的肩胛下肌腱采用双排缝线锚定技术修复。这包括在肩胛下肌足迹的内侧缘，即关节面外侧，放置 2 个内侧锚，使用≤45°的水平褥式缝线，以及 2 个外侧锚，使用水平褥式缝线。在对侧肩部创建标准化的 50%部分关节侧肩胛下肌病变。对侧肩部的肩胛下肌腱采用双锚腱内单排褥式缝线修复。每个标本在 10 到 100N 的循环加载下进行 50 次循环，然后进行拉伸测试直至失效。使用运动捕捉系统测量足迹区域的间隙形成和应变；从测试数据中确定刚度和失效载荷。
与双排修复相比，腱内单排修复的第一周期（（1.74 ± 0.38）mm 对（2.86 ± 0.46）mm）和最后一个周期（（3.77 ± 0.45）mm 对（5.89 ± 0.61）mm）的间隙形成明显较小（P <0.05）。腱内单排修复的足迹区域应变明显较小（P <0.05）。此外，它具有更高的平均极限拉伸载荷和刚度。
对于 III 级部分关节侧肩袖撕裂，腱内单排固定与双排固定相比具有更好的生物力学特性。
